Partners fear MoJ cuts will lead to 'brain drain' from publicly-funded work
The overwhelming majority of partners at commercial law firms believe Ministry of Justice (MoJ) plans to cut £350m from its annual legal aid budget will lead to a 'brain drain' of talented lawyers from publicly-funded work. Just under half of partners responding to Legal Week's Big Question survey said the scale of cuts will lead to a considerable brain drain from a sector already contending with low billing rates, with 8% claiming they will have an enormous impact and a further 40% saying they will make a small contribution to lawyers moving away from publicly-funded work.
November 26, 2010 at 08:04 AM
4 minute read
Partners predict an exodus from publicly-funded work as the MoJ plans to cut £350m from the legal aid budget but are split over whether cuts are justified. Friederike Heine reports
The overwhelming majority of partners at commercial law firms believe Ministry of Justice (MoJ) plans to cut £350m from its annual legal aid budget will lead to a 'brain drain' of talented lawyers from publicly-funded work.
Just under half of partners responding to Legal Week's Big Question survey said the scale of cuts will lead to a considerable brain drain from a sector already contending with low billing rates, with 8% claiming they will have an enormous impact and a further 40% saying they will make a small contribution to lawyers moving away from publicly-funded work.
The predicted exodus will be compounded by the existing low rates for publicly-funded legal work, with only 13% of City partners claiming current rates to be fair, with the remainder believing them to be too low – including 13% who branded them 'ridiculous'.
Clyde & Co litigation partner Ben Knowles commented: "The cuts are bad news for lawyers who work in areas that are publicly-funded, not only because the rates are low, but also because of the increasing unpredictability of government-funded work. This is likely to have the effect that ever more small law firms will go out of business."
However, the survey, which comes a week after the MoJ said it planned to cut £350m from its £2.1bn annual legal aid budget, found City partners were divided over the policy, with 37% deeming the cuts to be justified while 26% branded them as excessive. A further 40% had mixed feelings on the subject.
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer litigation partner Paul Lomas commented: "There is no doubt that the legal aid budget has been savaged and will only be used for a very limited number of basic needs."
Clifford Chance head of public policy and government affairs Oliver Bretz added: "It is good that criminal legal aid is safe-guarded. There are a lot of different categories within civil law and it will be important to make sure that justice is not impacted by the cuts."
Despite predicting that talented lawyers will move away from publicly-funded work, many partners are reluctant to see commercial law firms picking up the slack by significantly increasing their own pro bono efforts. While 35% of partners either agreed 'very much' or 'to a fair extent' that law firms should increase pro bono to help compensate, nearly 40% said firms should only step up efforts 'a bit', while just over 25% were strongly against such a move.
Lomas said: "The wider community may think that if the Government steps back, the gap will be filled by a supply of lawyers from the top commercial firms which mysteriously appear from the undergrowth ready for the task. But the London firms will simply not be able to plug the gap that will be created by the cuts to legal aid – they just do not have the resources, and are not set up to do that."
Nabarro corporate head Iain Newman added: "Further cuts to the legal aid budget will increase the pressure on the provision of legal services to vulnerable people. This gap is unlikely to be – and should not be – filled by the expansion of pro bono services."
The research also found that one in four partners believe the UK could perform better in terms of access to justice for the less well-off, while one-third of respondents felt large commercial law firms should be taking their own pro bono efforts more seriously.
Partners on legal aid cuts
- 13% of partners believe the current rates for publicly-funded legal work are 'ridiculous'
- 26% are strongly against commercial law firms increasing their pro bono efforts to compensate for the cuts to legal aid
- 41% think large commercial law firms currently take pro bono seriously
- 57% think the scale of the cuts will lead to a brain drain of talented lawyers from publicly-funded work
For more, see MoJ details legal aid cuts and plans for Jackson reforms.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![DeepSeek and the AI Revolution: Why One Legal Tech Expert Is Hitting Pause DeepSeek and the AI Revolution: Why One Legal Tech Expert Is Hitting Pause](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/4a/f6/62f476814a4bbe57b17e0afd2bdd/deepseek-app-4-767x633.jpg)
DeepSeek and the AI Revolution: Why One Legal Tech Expert Is Hitting Pause
4 minute read![What Happens When a Lateral Partner's Guaranteed Compensation Ends? What Happens When a Lateral Partner's Guaranteed Compensation Ends?](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/9c/47/f55d72654a2f9fc53f8bd33ff307/business-handshake-767x633.jpg)
What Happens When a Lateral Partner's Guaranteed Compensation Ends?
![Lawyers React To India’s 2025 Budget, Welcome Investment And Tax Reform Lawyers React To India’s 2025 Budget, Welcome Investment And Tax Reform](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/international-edition/contrib/content/uploads/sites/378/2024/08/Indian-Flag-767x633.jpg)
Lawyers React To India’s 2025 Budget, Welcome Investment And Tax Reform
![Russia’s Legal Sector Is Changing as Western Sanctions Take Their Toll Russia’s Legal Sector Is Changing as Western Sanctions Take Their Toll](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/international-edition/contrib/content/uploads/sites/378/2023/04/Moscow-Russia-767x633.jpg)
Russia’s Legal Sector Is Changing as Western Sanctions Take Their Toll
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1States Accuse Trump of Thwarting Court's Funding Restoration Order
- 2Microsoft Becomes Latest Tech Company to Face Claims of Stealing Marketing Commissions From Influencers
- 3Coral Gables Attorney Busted for Stalking Lawyer
- 4Trump's DOJ Delays Releasing Jan. 6 FBI Agents List Under Consent Order
- 5Securities Report Says That 2024 Settlements Passed a Total of $5.2B
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250